Fourth and final community vote about Meta Knight.

[thrillagorilla]

in reference to something about personal preference........

aren't the rules that the TOs use for their tournaments personal preference? Isn't the idea that "random not being the best for competitive play" personal preference?

No, they aren't. Its about fostering healthy competitive play. If the game dies, the rule-set was insufficient.

Hi thrilla how are you?

I'm quite well thank you. Yourself?

On a side note, I meant this post. My apologies for not clarifying.

 

[Eddie G]

TO's don't have to abide by SBR rules; it's more of a general guideline. They can basically do whatever the hell they want. The point is that nobody will attend tournaments where MK is banned, which is fine anyway because nobody important would attend scrub tournaments anyway.

Post was good and made perfect sense up until this point. Totally false and unnecessary. Money is money, "important people" (especially some of those who don't play as MK) will attend to compete for the money; that's just how it works. Learn to end your posts a sentence early sometimes.

 

[Masmasher@]

marko people sometimes just follow the SBR even though random stuff like items were never throughlly tested


" people dont set trends they just hop on ****s" to put it bluntly at the same time its probably for the best.

 

[ShadowLink84]

No, they aren't. Its about fostering healthy competitive play. If the game dies, the rule-set was insufficient.



I'm quite well thank you. Yourself?

On a side note, I meant this post. My apologies for not clarifying.

I actually agree with it. I am just trying to find a way to get the criteria to match to a pro-ban argument.

Mind you I am only playing devil's advocate.

 

[fkacyan]

Ah you know what, let me do like thio.
*walks away*

Good man. I'm practicing Fox tech skill now. ^_^

 

[Deleted member]

This debate has polarized the entire website. Go into any regional zone thread and they're discussing it.

This means the SBR should be seen as the United Nations. Yes, they're knowledgeable, but they shouldn't make the ultimate decision on something so clearly divided. Let the poll decide once and for all.

A vote for the ban is a vote for democracy.

 

[thrillagorilla]

I actually agree with it. I am just trying to find a way to get the criteria to match to a pro-ban argument.

Mind you I am only playing devil's advocate.

Its the best way to learn. Its how I gained my stance during the last thread. Then again, you already knew that. XD

 

[ShadowLink84]

Good man. I'm practicing Fox tech skill now. ^_^

Good luck. Fox is tough.

@thrilla: Yeah I remember ^_^. DIdnt you and Yuna argue about the CP system as well? Or am I remembering incorrectly?

 

[fkacyan]

This debate has polarized the entire website. Go into any regional zone thread and they're discussing it.

This means the SBR should be seen as the United Nations. Yes, they're knowledgeable, but they shouldn't make the ultimate decision on something so clearly divided. Let the poll decide once and for all.

A vote for the ban is a vote for democracy.

OK, then, and we'll do it like the Security Council. Or the electoral college. I like that. Because, ya know, popular vote doesn't count for much nowadays, ya know?

Also, there are a ton of randoms and idiots who voted. A friend of mine voted for ban just because he thought the notion of it happening was hilarious; he's long since quit. You want THAT type of person deciding the future of the metagame?

 

[Melomaniacal]

This debate has polarized the entire website. Go into any regional zone thread and they're discussing it.

This means the SBR should be seen as the United Nations. Yes, they're knowledgeable, but they shouldn't make the ultimate decision on something so clearly divided. Let the poll decide once and for all.

A vote for the ban is a vote for democracy.

As much as I wish this could work, it can't. Seriously, just go to the poll result screen and click a few random names.

Well over half of the people voting don't know jack **** about this game, or it's competitive community.

 

[Clai]

Arrgh why'd you have to make your response in such a fashion. It makes go grrrr cause cant simply cpoy paste your name when quoting.
arrrghh grrrrrr

I lol'd here.

Actually it can go from something event to a soft disadvantage.

Snake does NOT want to go to rainbow cruise, and he sure as hell hates any sage that would interfere with his ground game.

Wario I am not too sure about, I would need to ask Fiction.

A soft disadvantage is still perfectly winnable. It does not, by any means, invalidate the matchup. We're saying that with the combination of character and stage, Metaknight can't have a soft disadvantage ever? Boo-hoo, he is the best character in the game, you just have to work harder to beat him.

Playing to win is all that matters. If you play to win you go with the best choice. At the start of a set that choice is MK because while he may not have the largest advantage, he will not suffer a disadvantage.

I'll respond to this when you get to my statement that said "If you are uncomfortable with picking whatever choice you choose, even if it's the best choice, you've lost the match before it begins.

Woah woah woah. Terrible flaw in your argument.
Simply because money is on the line does not mean that the best they are giving is their absolute best.

trying your hardest doesnt automatically mean you are playing at peak efficiency.
For example the matches between ally and m2k where m2k was spiked by Fairs, landed on minesm, and made several errors that cost him the match.

Woah woah woah, so people are choosing not to play their hardest when money's on the line? Don't they want to win the money? Isn't that, for most people, the sole reason for coming out to a tournament? I say it's a fine assumption.

Such a statement is far too generic and ignores the many variables that come along with simply being human.

I can say the same for numerous points in your argument as well. Carrying on...

The point is not that Mk is taking a character to a stage that absolutely destroys them, but is taking them to a stage that they perform less efficiently.
Diddy's performance on battlefield is lesser than that on FD.
Snake's performance on Halberd is greater than his performance on FD or SV.

Yeah yeah, soft advantage to the Metaknight, we already went through that...

It isn't about MK destroying a character, its about him always being the safest choice and always ensuring he will never be disadvantaged.
Since ev when he is taken to the opponents best stage, he still has the tools to deal with it and ensure the matchup is not in his disadvantage.

I cannot see how this refutes the argument regarding MK's resistance to CPing.
Every other character except MK has a stage where they suffer some sort of disadvantage.
For Diddy this is stage withplatforms like lylat cruise.
For Olimar its rainbow.
For Falco its Battlefield.

MK has none, the worst is FD and it is hi worst in that he GAINS the least from i. Where as every oher character loses something MK loses nothing. Making it extremely hard to deal with him and exploit his few weaknesses.

Did you forget the central point of my argument? The one that says that the best and most overused character in the game =/= ban-worthy? Please prove to me how Metaknight is so much better than everyone else that he deserves a ban. Don't tell me that Metaknight is the best character in the game. We already know that.

Except that this argument is invalid. For one many other games, as I said earlier, do not involve interaction from the stage.

Even the most minor of influences from the stage can have an impact on gameplay in the smash series.
Platforms will impact on Diddy's banana game.
lowe borders and aplatform impacts on snake's game.
A constantly moving stage that does not allow for camping impacts Olimar's.
So on and so forth.

And yet stage interaction is already discussed when we talk about character matchups. You know, the part where we said that cleverly counterpicking a stage can give a slight advantage to Metaknight? Continuing on...

It isn't just one or the other, its the fact that both combined are not enough to place MK in a position where his weaknesses can be exploited with low risk.
So your argument cannot really refute my statement because it relies on the separation of these two factors.

My argument hinges on both these issues, both stage and character.

And yet you still fail to prove that being the best character in the game means that he should be banned. People have already beaten Metaknight, as in won sets against Metaknight, meaning the Metaknight player counterpicked the stage to have a slight advantage and still lost.

This is not true at all.
Simply based upon character capability it is obvious that stages will impact on thei performance. No matter how good of a palyer you are, there are weaknesses that ou simply cannot cover completely.

Even the best Diddy player will have an issue with Luigi on FD. This becomes even more difficult in an area like battlefield or rainbow cruise where he cannot utilizhis bananas to the greatest of their effect.

So the argment that top players aren't affected by the CP system is invalid. Simply because if they are not affected, then it is due in part to the character.
Olimar's ground game is always going to have issues in RC and will always have an issue facing Peach.

And yet top players are able to work around it and win despite these advantages. Crazy, huh?

A completely viable character against MK, is simply another MK.
Snake has his stages where he does lesser than normal.
So does DDD, DK, Olimar, Lucario, Marth , ROB etc etc.
It is an unavoidable issue.

Metaknight is better than the rest of the cast. WE GET IT ALREADY!

Woh woah, back up for a second.
How can you be too objective?
An objective agument contains no bias, does not attempt to persuade here logic and evidence fails.
if I provided frame data fr and it showed he had shield advantage on every move, how is that too objective?

You cannot be too objective, for objectivity is actually the basis of the ban requirement.
Over centralization is an objective requirement.

Sorry, should I have say too robotic? I'm trying to prove that the people who are working the pro-ban argument aren't giving a care about what the people who are actually playing this game think. They're saying that if people don't counterpick Metaknight by picking Metaknight, those people are fools who don't understand what the best choice for them is. That's not right.

THat is irrelevant. If I choose to play a Ganondorf against MK, how does that at all refute my statement i regards to CPing?
All it means is that the player made a REALLY illogical choice that will harm him/her greatly.
This argument is too subjective to hold any merit, the player's error, or choices in not choosing to play to win hold no weight.
Since such arguments are subjective and can go either way.
That is the inherent flaw to them.

You should have played me at Gametable. I have a mean Ganon. I'm even starting to use him against Metaknight now.

Getting to the point though, if people (like me) think that they're going to do better against Metaknight with Ganondorf than any other character, who's going to blame them for trying? If they really know their stuff with Ganon and they're going to put in the time and effort to master the matchup and win it at all costs, is it really more right to tell them that they should instead pick up a character who may be foreign to them and potentially even harm them more greatly? Not everyone can be good with Metaknight, you know.

But you're right, this argument is incredibly subjective and prone to flaws. To each their own.

your argument does not refute, primarily because it separates CPing into character and stage, whereas my argument is involving both of them.
The second part in regards to the players CP choices is irrelevant because we assume that the player will always want to make the best choice in the situation and not a completely illogical one such as choosing Ganondorf against MK on Rainbow Cruise.

Yo, Ganon is amazing on Rainbow Cruise. There's like fifty platforms there to make sure he doesn't get gimped.

URG! You're distracting me. Again, this is really subjective, all I have to say about this is that MANY, MANY people have been able to topple Metaknight whether it was by simply outplaying them, or maybe creating strategies that seem completely crazy to everyone else (like the whole Ganon-Rainbow Cruise thing) that end up helping the other player beat the Metaknight player. There's an entire X-factor that goes into this, but whatever it is, Metaknight is beaten too often to deserve a ban.

 

[phi1ny3]

This debate has polarized the entire website. Go into any regional zone thread and they're discussing it.

This means the SBR should be seen as the United Nations. Yes, they're knowledgeable, but they shouldn't make the ultimate decision on something so clearly divided. Let the poll decide once and for all.

A vote for the ban is a vote for democracy.

*Imagines himself to be SWF's North Korea*
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
I could care less about the SBR U.N.'s opinion on these matters!
MOAR FIYAHPOWAH!

On a serious note, finally voting, I think I'm going to put my trust in the legendary figure known as lucario Kim Jong-il

 

[Deleted member]

OK, then, and we'll do it like the Security Council. Or the electoral college. I like that. Because, ya know, popular vote doesn't count for much nowadays, ya know?

Also, there are a ton of randoms and idiots who voted. A friend of mine voted for ban just because he thought the notion of it happening was hilarious; he's long since quit. You want THAT type of person deciding the future of the metagame?

There are joke votes and throw away votes in every election. The same happens in polls, surveys, etc.

I personally believe this issue should be left to the general public. Yes, it allows for stupid people to vote, but that's democracy. And it's the only viable system, frankly.

First past the post. 51%. It doesn't matter. Allow the poll to dictate what happens next. It's the only way. Giving the SBR the full power for a matter this controversial is ridiculous, and rather tyrannical. The SBR is invite-only. Imagine if your city was run by dudes fresh outta university with a PhD in PoliSci. Imagine if they were invited to help run the show.

As much as I wish this could work, it can't. Seriously, just go to the poll result screen and click a few random names.

Well over half of the people voting don't know jack **** about this game, or it's competitive community.

That doesn't matter. Elections world wide have uninformed people participating in them. That just means advocates for either side needs to step their game up.

Hell, Obama was practically America's sweetheart. He could have taken a dump, LIVE, in one of the debates and still win hands down.

 

[Clai]

So that's why you need to think of a way around it. Like why don't you try to learn on how to DI out of his Tornado and how to avoid getting gimped. I hate that his D-Air gimps my Ike but that doesn't stop me from thinking on how to avoid it. Johny complainers

Tell me about it...

 

[cookieM0Nster]

Guys, even if MK is banned, this will only happen in tournaments, and scrubs will not pay any attention.

I'll bet anything that more people vote for banning MK.

 

[Yunior597]

We know Metaknight is overused, but if meta knight get banned, soon or later Ice climbers will get banned too.

I use IC grain grab and i don't want them banned, neither MK.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Did you forget the central point of my argument? The one that says that the best and most overused character in the game =/= ban-worthy? Please prove to me how Metaknight is so much better than everyone else that he deserves a ban. Don't tell me that Metaknight is the best character in the game. We already know that.

And yet you still fail to prove that being the best character in the game means that he should be banned. People have already beaten Metaknight, as in won sets against Metaknight, meaning the Metaknight player counterpicked the stage to have a slight advantage and still lost.

Shadowlink is anti-ban.

He just thinks MK is better then we think.

 

[Masmasher@]

The SBR creation and stablization is our ****ing fault lol we play the games. We warped them so much.....

 

[momochuu]

We know Metaknight is overused, but if meta knight get banned, soon or later Ice climbers will get banned too.

I use IC grain grab and i don't want them banned, neither MK.

Ice Climbers will never get banned. If the community becomes THAT bad where they have to ban Ice Climbers, I probably won't play Brawl anymore.

 

[thrillagorilla]

Good luck. Fox is tough.

@thrilla: Yeah I remember ^_^. DIdnt you and Yuna argue about the CP system as well? Or am I remembering incorrectly?

Yeah, we did. You remember correctly sir. He won when he pointed out that the cp system wasn't the end all for competitive viability, and that Metaknight doesn't even break it due to even match-ups being in existence. Though a player may not have the option for picking a character that puts Metaknight at a disadvantage (at least in the current Meta-game) they can still choose a character that allows perfectly well for competition to occur. It may not be the most desirable situation for some, but it is perfectly acceptable as far as universal competitive values are concerned.

Edit: @adumbrodeus & Shadowlink: Characters like Pika and Fox are absurdly under-rated/ represented as well though.

 

[Melomaniacal]

That doesn't matter. Elections world wide have uninformed people participating in them. That just means advocates for either side needs to step their game up.

Hell, Obama was practically America's sweetheart. He could have taken a dump, LIVE, in one of the debates and still win hands down.

At least the people voting live in the country their voting on.

Most of the people voting on this poll have never been to a legitimate tournament.

And bringing up politics is probably a terrible idea.

 

[Alus]

What the hell is politics doing on a "serious" [Questionable] debate about a game?

Get that stuff out.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Point 1 Response: I again want to ask, how and what exactly do you mean by, "Brawl's basically just become how to beat MK and Snake to a lesser extent?" Do you mean that's what's talked about the most in individual character board? Do you mean that's what people spend their most time doing at in person tournaments? Do you mean that's why character boards constantly look to propel their metagame and find new usages for the tools they already possess? What do you mean, "The game has turned into how to beat MK?"

For a week at a character board and during these, "lol ban MK" threads are the only times where the community is that focused on the MK match-up as a whole. Saying that's what all Brawl has become is just a statement that I can't believe because there's no proof behind it, and I have not seen it.

Point 2 Response: Okay.

Point 3 Response: Alright. However, being unable to put a permanent advantage on=/=breaks the CP system. If it's your CP, you can CP him to Halberd and go Snake, or FD and go Diddy/ICs, or Battlefield and go ICs, Even if whatever you CP him to isn't on paper your advantage, you're still able to put yourself into a better advantage that is at least even.

Point 4 Response: Refer to 3. You can counterpick MK on your counterpick, or at least get to even. There weren't really qualms with this in Melee with Fox having no consistent disadvantageous match-up. A retort will probably be something along the lines of, "They're different games with different mechanics!" True. But still, a character with no consistent bad match-ups existed, and the CP system and metagame didn't fall apart.

What you mentioned about Wario and Snake are match-up specific. Just because characters can infinite Wario doesn't mean he loses the match-ups. Just because people can juggle Snake doesn't mean he loses the match-ups where he gets juggled. I don't understand why you brought that up.

Point 5 Response: How is it obvious? When I say MK dominating mid-levels of play, I meant tournament results proving this. My part 6 response was trying to show that there are instances in mid levels of play where MKs lose, and somewhat frequently. I don't see why he'd be harder to manage at a mid-level of play. Match-up specifically, maybe, but as far as tournament results go, we don't see MK always taking the 30-40 person tournaments, which was what I was trying to explain.

Point 6 Response: See above. It wasn't to say, "Look, these people beat MK at a mid-level, ergo he's not a problem." I was trying to put in evidence via tournament results by saying that mid-level MKs get frequently beaten just as much as anyone else.

Point 7 Response: I thought Azen quit smash in general. Also, they don't really have to be known players, I guess saying tournament attending players would have been better. Most of the people who quit Brawl for Brawl+ or BBrawl quit because they didn't like the game Brawl in general, not specifically because of Meta Knight. I can't think of any people who quit the entire game specifically because of Meta Knight. I'm sure there might be some, but there's also the people who quit Brawl because of the infinites, or the lack of a common tech-skill layer, or the fact that BlazBlue came out and they wanted to play that more, etc.

Point 8 Response: lolllwuttttthurrr.

Makes unviable: Toon Link, in that list. Pikachu? Lolwut. MK isn't that bad of a match-up for Pikachu. He makes R.O.B. less viable if only because ZSS destroys him harder. Same with Olimar and Peach. Pit I honestly don't know about. Add Peach to this list.

Makes less viable: R.O.B., Marth. Game and Watch. Ice Climbers is just wrong, considering that they're one of the characters people speculate to go even with him.

Point 9 Response: My statement that, "It assumes that counterpicking characters is often used at high and even mid levels of play" wasn't really disproven, and was just worded around. Sure, MK is unique in the game in that you can't have a universal character counterpick against him, but you can still counterpick him, and given that in mid and high levels of play, the character counterpick system isn't used much, then it's a lot less important than many are making it sound.

Point 1. To put it simply, if you dig around each of the character boards, beating Metaknight is the main concern of most of them. For example, Ike's worst match up is Olimar but, all in all, the number of Metaknight players dwarfs the number of Olimar players. This is why Metaknight is a bigger concern for ROB players than ZSS. This is why Diddy players usually care more about Metaknight than Peach players. This is why Mr. Game and Watch players care more about Metaknight players than Toon Link players. Aside from a few characters like Wario (who really doesn't fear anybody anymore, truth be told ) and Donkey Kong, this is how it is.

So I don't have to explain it in a later point, that's why ROB is kept from becoming viable more so by Metaknight than ZSS. Much fewer people play as ZSS and, off the top of my head, Snakee is the only really noteworthy one. Also, ZSS has one of the highest learning curves of the whole cast and she's okay against other high characters so it's very unlikely that a huge surge of people would suddenly pick her up just to counter ROB.

Point 2. Ness: Okay.

Point 3. For Brawl, I say it does given how much fewer factors decide a match up than, say, a game like Melee. They say that the first match is the most important for a set so depending on a "couterpick" that simply makes the match up even afterwords, simply refutes itself the next match when the Metaknight can counterpick a stage that puts the match back in his favor. I mean, look at Donkey Kong vs King Dedede. Some people argue that, if it wasn't for the infinite, the match up would be close to even and the same is said about Bowser vs King Dedede. These are match ups are that are pretty much decided by one thing and, in a sense, a lot of people who are bad against Metaknight are like this. Falco does fine against Metaknight... until he planks. ROB does okay... until Metaknight gets him in the air. Olimar does fine agianst Metaknight... until Metaknight gets him offstage.

Point 4. Only because Fox didn't run away with tournaments. At the peak of Melee's metagame, wasn't Marth the highest ranked character? Regardless, as I said before, the game was more "balanced" if not only in the sense that there wasn't a freakishly huge gap between the best characters like there is in Brawl. Heck, the two best players, Ken and Isai, didn't even used the two best characters in the game. Ken used Marth and Isai used Captain Falcon. Also, Fox's meer presence didn't drag down the top/high tier like Metaknight does with Brawl. Fox had simpler methods that made the match up more managable like Dr. Mario's uthrow and Jigglypuff's "Spacey killer." In Melee, Fox making a mistake could result in him losing a stock in the right hands. Fox didn't have five methods of recovery and with the shine could only theorically negate every attack in the game. With this being said, the only character that ever come close to being like Metaknight is Shiek and even then it was discovered within a year how to kick her down a notch (and Link too to a much stronger degree). Obviously, despite many promises from the anti-ban side, this has yet to happen and Metaknight is still the run away dominant character.

Point 5. As explained in the past, Metaknight doesn't have to win all the tournaments in order to be the best. As the Amazing Ampharos showed in his post of all the major tournament placings this year, Metaknight and Snake were tied with first place winnings but Metaknight still had triple the placings of Snake who in turn had double the placings of the third place character (I think it was Diddy, I don't fully remember). Again, the gap between Metaknight and the rest of the cast is still bonkers (wait... did I just say bonkers? ) despite more than a year passing since Metaknight overtook Snake and it definately doesn't help that no major discoveries have been made in quite some time. Like mentioned in point four, things were discovered at a slower rate for Melee because it was a smaller community but even then, finding a way of defeat Shiek was found faster than it has been for Metaknight and that was back in like 2002/2003. When viewed like this, it more than shows that things aren't going to change that much with Metaknight despite people being optimistic that a counter will eventually emerge.

Point 6. Well isn't it all the same then in that regard? From what I gather, I said that Metaknight is dominant in both but more so in mid-level play but you are saying that he's about the same in both?

Point 7. I read what you said and what Goodoldganon said but, as said before, aside from Metaknight, all the gay stuff in Brawl can be counterpicked against and, when it comes to the mid/low tiers, it's about the same as Melee except they definately had more options against the higher tiers (although some of them were just as screwed in the long run). In a way, everything else can be reasonably dealt with via counterpicking.

Point 8. Toon Link does fairly well against the high tiers overall and is even a counter to Mr. Game and Watch and some would argue even Diddy Kong. If anything, he is a character who I've been the most impressed by his growth this year and what Santi has been able to do with him.

Pikachu's similar to Toon Link in that regard too. When played right, he can counter Snake, he's a big nusance to King Dedede, he does fairly well against Marth, Ice Climbers, Diddy Kong, ROB, and Falco. Overall, the only other high tier character he does bad against is Mr. Game and Watch.

I already explained ROB back in point one.

Olimar's argued to be to be a Snake counter in the right conditions, he's one of King Dedede's worst matchups, he does fairly well against Falco, Wario, Diddy, Marth, etc. His worst matchups aren't even high tier characters. His worst match ups are Luigi and Peach but, as said before, Metaknight might as well be first since the number of esteemed Luigi and Peach is a fraction of the number of Metaknight players out there. (Come to think of it, theBoss8 and Edress are the only major Luigi/Peach players I know.)

Aside from Metaknight and Mr. Game and Watch (Metaknight being worse and Mr. Game and Watch being managable if Pit doesn't go crazy with the arrows), Pit does pretty well against the top/high tiers. Unfortunately, he only has one major player backing him up (Sagemoon) so his tournament rankings are garbage at the moment.

I have a hard time agreeing with Peach. VS Metaknight is garbage, obviously, but Mr. Game and Watch and Marth are sometimes argued to be just as bad. Snake seems rough seeing how Snake's utilt wrecks her floating game and his ftilt wrecks her approaches. Hmm... On the other hand, Peach does have the Dthrow pseudo chain grab on him and can basically make him her little plaything if she can get him in the air or caught in a floating dair... Tough call... She beats Olimar and Diddy Kong but kind of has it hard against Falco and King Dedede. Oh, I almost forgot, she does have the "careless" infinite against Wario but, ideally, Wario shouldn't be grabbed and the match up isn't bad for him either aside from that.

Regarding the Ice Climbers, there are some stages that make it royally hard for them against Metaknight like Rainbow Cruise so I still say it would take a big weight off their shoulders considering how they counter King Dedede and can counter Snake if they don't go crazy with chain grabs and be aware of when Snake uses grenades. They may be hurt overall if the number of ROB players increase but, as I mentioned in another post, I seriously doubt that certain characters would be popular across all regions if Metaknight got the boot.

Point 9. Addressed in 3, 4, and 5 (again).

 

[Deleted member]

At least the people voting live in the country their voting on.

Most of the people voting on this poll have never been to a legitimate tournament.

And bringing up politics is probably a terrible idea.

Why is it a bad idea? Whenever you allow the general public a voice, a majority will act on it and vote. Some will vote out of spite; some will vote out of strategy, but it's still a vote. That's how it works, and it's how it should work here.

I find it also ridiculous that the SBR has to come to a completely arbitrary decision at 2/3s agreement. The odds are stacked.

 

[fkacyan]

There are joke votes and throw away votes in every election. The same happens in polls, surveys, etc.

I personally believe this issue should be left to the general public. Yes, it allows for stupid people to vote, but that's democracy. And it's the only viable system, frankly.

First past the post. 51%. It doesn't matter. Allow the poll to dictate what happens next. It's the only way. Giving the SBR the full power for a matter this controversial is ridiculous, and rather tyrannical. The SBR is invite-only. Imagine if your city was run by dudes fresh outta university with a PhD in PoliSci. Imagine if they were invited to help run the show.



That doesn't matter. Elections world wide have uninformed people participating in them. That just means advocates for either side needs to step their game up.

Hell, Obama was practically America's sweetheart. He could have taken a dump, LIVE, in one of the debates and still win hands down.

Just because it is done terribly wrong elsewhere doesn't mean it has to be done here. That is one of the more commonly used fallacies. You'll have to think of a better argument to convince me to use a statistically useless (As in, does not deviate enough from 50/50 to be considered different) poll with several bias problems.

 

[generalsmash]

Tell me about it...

There's not much to say, it's frustrating to see a short**** mofo with wings beat you like that :/ I really don't care much if they ban him from tournys because I'm not old enough to drive and my parents hate it when I play videogames

 

[MetalMusicMan]

Democracy is not purely about "the majority public vote" and "just leaving it to the public" when it comes to decisions.

You clearly have no understanding whatsoever about the democratic process.

 

[Deleted member]

Just because it is done terribly wrong elsewhere doesn't mean it has to be done here. That is one of the more commonly used fallacies. You'll have to think of a better argument to convince me to use a statistically useless (As in, does not deviate enough from 50/50 to be considered different) poll with several bias problems.

You're telling me - you just conclusively called the system terribly wrong without showing any evidence or proving otherwise. That's begging the question, sir. (One of the more commonly used fallacies! I'm a philosophy major, bro.)

I'm not saying democracy is perfect. No system is. Yet with a debate this polarized, allowing everyone's input is necessary. Otherwise, what is the point of riling us all up in this silly thread? What's the point of tantalizing us with the poll?

The SBR wants to see public opinion. While I commend them for AT LEAST doing that, they should relinquish the power of this matter over to the people who will be affected by it most - the typical tournament player.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Democracy is not about "the majority public vote".

You clearly have no understanding whatsoever about the democratic process.

Nothing about this process is democratic. We don't elect the SBR, lol.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Why is it a bad idea? Whenever you allow the general public a voice, a majority will act on it and vote. Some will vote out of spite; some will vote out of strategy, but it's still a vote. That's how it works, and it's how it should work here.

I find it also ridiculous that the SBR has to come to a completely arbitrary decision at 2/3s agreement. The odds are stacked.

Sorry, I meant talking about Obama. The last thing we want is a politics flame-war.

 

[demonictoonlink]

TL goes even to disadvantaged against GaW...
He doesn't do great against high tiers... (@ FMOI)

 

[MetalMusicMan]

Nothing about this process is democratic. We don't elect the SBR, lol.

Exactly-- and thank goodness we don't.


I was referring to whatever 'tard said that we should just "leave the entire decision to whatever this poll says, because that's the 'Democratic way'".

 

[Fatmanonice]

Just for the sake of saying it, if Metaknight is banned, I think the online community here has agreed that he'll still be allowed in online tournaments simply because, of the lag, he's not the best character and characters like Snake legitimately counter him online. May not be any consolation to most of you but it's something to think about. *shamelessly promotes his own tournaments*

 

[Deleted member]

Democracy is not about "the majority public vote".

You clearly have no understanding whatsoever about the democratic process.

When did I ever ****ing say that? I hate you random noobs and your strawmen, holy ****. You misconstrued my words. The majority of people, when given a chance to speak up, will do so. I didn't mean that the majority of people should get a vote.

Everybody should.

 

[fkacyan]

You're telling me - you just conclusively called the system terribly wrong without showing any evidence or proving otherwise. That's begging the question, sir. (One of the more commonly used fallacies! I'm a philosophy major, bro.)

I'm not saying democracy is perfect. No system is. Yet with a debate this polarized, allowing everyone's input is necessary. Otherwise, what is the point of riling us all up in this silly thread? What's the point of tantalizing us with the poll?

The SBR wants to see public opinion. While I commend them for AT LEAST doing that, they should relinquish the power of this matter over to the people who will be affected by it most - the typical tournament player.

The issue within the system has been mentioned more than once: Uneducated, uninformed people voting. Your reasoning for this being allowed here is this:

That doesn't matter. Elections world wide have uninformed people participating in them. That just means advocates for either side needs to step their game up.

That is to say, it's fine here because American democracy uses it. No! Fallacy! Wrong wrong wrong! And I wasn't begging the question, btw.

On another note, I'm not your bro.

 

[MetalMusicMan]

When did I ever ****ing say that? I hate you random noobs and your strawmen, holy ****.

How do your words taste? Do they taste good?

I personally believe this issue should be left to the general public. Yes, it allows for stupid people to vote, but that's democracy. And it's the only viable system, frankly.

lmfao.


Yeah, I totally strawmanned you dude. Totally. TOTALLY. lmfao

 

[•Col•]

I'm curious... How many member are there in the SBR?

 

[ShadowLink84]

A soft disadvantage is still perfectly winnable. It does not, by any means, invalidate the matchup. We're saying that with the combination of character and stage, Metaknight can't have a soft disadvantage ever? Boo-hoo, he is the best character in the game, you just have to work harder to beat him.

That isn't just the issue though, it means that everything eventually falls down to using MK because he is so safe. This lets you control the CP system since MK is an answer toe verything, Not the best choice but is very safe.
Like i said, he does not have to be unbeatable in order to be ban worthy.

I'll respond to this when you get to my statement that said "If you are uncomfortable with picking whatever choice you choose, even if it's the best choice, you've lost the match before it begins.

Correct but we assume high level play where such nuances are not important.
We assume the characters are of high level and ignore the player who tends to bring in tons of issues,

Woah woah woah, so people are choosing not to play their hardest when money's on the line? Don't they want to win the money? Isn't that, for most people, the sole reason for coming out to a tournament? I say it's a fine assumption.

My error it probably came out wrong.
What i mean is they try their hardest, but they may not play their best.
Again i bring up M2k vs ally, where he was spiked by an easily avoided Fair from Snake.

If you then look at the match he played a week later, he played against ally much better.
You are trying your hardest at that moment, but it may not be your best.

I can say the same for numerous points in your argument as well. Carrying on...

How so? My argument is keeping the player out of the debate.
Explain?

Yeah yeah, soft advantage to the Metaknight, we already went through that...

Correct, but it isnt just having an advantage though it is part of it, its because it falls down to MK being the best choice overall, and thus, everyone must use him otherwise, they risk getting a bad amtchup.

Did you forget the central point of my argument? The one that says that the best and most overused character in the game =/= ban-worthy? Please prove to me how Metaknight is so much better than everyone else that he deserves a ban. Don't tell me that Metaknight is the best character in the game. We already know that.

That's your first error. You are automatically assuming that the character in question must be much better than everyone else. This is not true.
The character only has to overcentralize by nature. He doesn't have to be the equivalent of Akuma or even Old Sagat. He simply must overcentralize the game.

As such, my argument is that he over centralizes not because he is so much better, but because he is so much safer than other choices.
By playing MK alone you limit your opponents CP choices greatly, both stage and character wise, they can only counter this incredible resistance with MK himself to ensure no disadvantage.

And yet stage interaction is already discussed when we talk about character matchups. You know, the part where we said that cleverly counterpicking a stage can give a slight advantage to Metaknight? Continuing on...

Not necessarily true. Mind you matchup often argue on neutral stages where there isn't much inteference, counterpicking itself is meant to influence those matchups and move them in either way for the player.

So a matchup for Diddy on FD is not the same as it would be on Rainbow cruise.
Do you understand or am I being vague?

I am not pro-ban so its rather hard to articulate such thoughts.

And yet you still fail to prove that being the best character in the game means that he should be banned. People have already beaten Metaknight, as in won sets against Metaknight, meaning the Metaknight player counterpicked the stage to have a slight advantage and still lost.
[/quote[
Except that is NOT the requirement for a ban.
MK is the best, but being the best is not the only requirement to being ban worthy.
You must also over centralize.

As such my argument aims to prove that metaknight over centralizes.

M2k is losing to ally.
Ally is losing to m2k.
Those players are NOT the characters, they are the users, they are influenced by everything.
As such we refer to only the characters.

Simply because Ally may destroy a sonic with falcon does not change the matchup. It can be used as indirect support, offering the possibility, but is not solid evidence because of the mere fact the players are human.

Ganondorf should never beat an MK on Rainbow cruise, if it happens, its simply the exception that proves the rule.

The status quo is that of overcentralization, thus, I aim to prove it by showing that MK's incredible resistance to the CP system causes the game to over centralize around him.
Not that he is so much better that he requires a ban.

And yet top players are able to work around it and win despite these advantages. Crazy, huh?

If you have a large enough skill gap, even the worst of matchups can be won.
You are relying too much on inductive reasoning and it hurts your argument.

Metaknight is better than the rest of the cast. WE GET IT ALREADY!

You are missing the point.
yes he is better.
He is NOT much better than the other characters, he is rarely the best choice.
He is the safest, and thus, overcentralizes.

Sorry, should I have say too robotic? I'm trying to prove that the people who are working the pro-ban argument aren't giving a care about what the people who are actually playing this game think. They're saying that if people don't counterpick Metaknight by picking Metaknight, those people are fools who don't understand what the best choice for them is. That's not right.

But it is true.
Why choose DK against DDD where infinites are allowed?
or Mario, Luigi, Samus or Bowser?

Why go Fox against Pikachu?
Play to win is all that matters , not the subjective behavior.

You should have played me at Gametable. I have a mean Ganon. I'm even starting to use him against Metaknight now.

Use him against m2k. I don't play MK.
Tell me how well you fair.
No I am serious, I am very interested in your performance.

Getting to the point though, if people (like me) think that they're going to do better against Metaknight with Ganondorf than any other character, who's going to blame them for trying? If they really know their stuff with Ganon and they're going to put in the time and effort to master the matchup and win it at all costs, is it really more right to tell them that they should instead pick up a character who may be foreign to them and potentially even harm them more greatly? Not everyone can be good with Metaknight, you know.

irrelevant.

You being more comfortable with a character will not change the character. All it does is reflect upon the players behavior and performance.
The player is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

But you're right, this argument is incredibly subjective and prone to flaws. To each their own.

True.

Yo, Ganon is amazing on Rainbow Cruise. There's like fifty platforms there to make sure he doesn't get gimped.

Well its just everything else that gets you, not just the gimping.

URG! You're distracting me. Again, this is really subjective, all I have to say about this is that MANY, MANY people have been able to topple Metaknight whether it was by simply outplaying them, or maybe creating strategies that seem completely crazy to everyone else (like the whole Ganon-Rainbow Cruise thing) that end up helping the other player beat the Metaknight player. There's an entire X-factor that goes into this, but whatever it is, Metaknight is beaten too often to deserve a ban.

The issue is that the X factor or human factor, does not matter or play a part in the argument at hand.

It can be used as support for the POSSIBILITY, but cannot be used as solid evidence.
Otherwise, its simply the exception that proves the rule.

 

[demonictoonlink]

I think about 100

 

[Deleted member]

How do your words taste? Do they taste good?






lmfao.


Yeah, I totally strawmanned you dude. Totally. TOTALLY. lmfao

What the hell are you talking about? General public means everyone

E v e r y o n e

Noobs, scrubs, pros, amateurs, casuals, SBR members. Everyone. We vote democratically or not at all.